Undercover police used James Bond-style womanising tactics

The womanising tactics famously deployed by the fictional spy James Bond to
glean information may have been used by undercover police, a High Court
judge has suggested.

Image 1 of 2

Mr Justice Tugendhat cited Bond as the best known fictional example of a similar situationPhoto: ALAMY

Image 1 of 2

Some of the claimants say they had relationships with Mark Kennedy

By Rosa Silverman

3:06PM GMT 17 Jan 2013

Considering the case of a group of environmental activists who claim they were tricked into forming relationships with covert officers, Mr Justice Tugendhat cited Bond as the best known fictional example of an intelligence services member who used relationships with women for his own professional ends.

"Since he was writing a light entertainment, Ian Fleming did not dwell on the extent to which his hero used deception, still less upon the psychological harm he might have done to the women concerned,” he said.

"But fictional accounts - and there are others - lend credence to the view that the intelligence and police services have for many years deployed both men and women officers to form personal relationships of an intimate sexual nature - whether or not they were physical relationships - in order to obtain information or access."

The case centres on the claims of 10 women and one man who are seeking compensation for emotional trauma allegedly caused by officers infiltrating activist groups.

The women say they had a sexual relationship with a man who was later discovered to be a covert human intelligence source, while the male claimant alleges a non-sexual relationship.

Some of the claimants say they had relationships with Mark Kennedy, the undercover police officer who spent seven years spying on environmental activists posing as a long-haired dropout climber called Mark "Flash" Stone.

The group argue their human right to respect for their private lives was breached.

In a ruling yesterday, the judge agreed they could proceed with their High Court damages action, but said their claims brought under the Human Rights Act against the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police should be determined behind closed doors by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), as the police had wanted.

The IPT holds a number of hearings in private and has no obligation to take oral evidence.

The decision was met with anger from the group, who said it would prevent “both the claimants and the public from seeing the extent of the violations of human rights and abuses of public office perpetrated by these undercover units.”

Harriet Wistrich, a lawyer acting for the claimants, said: "The claimants have already suffered a gross violation of their privacy and abuse of trust by the police.

"If the case is dealt with by the IPT, they will be denied access to justice and may never discover why they were thus violated by the state."

The group said they had brought the case because they wanted to see an end to “sexual and psychological abuse of campaigners for social justice and others by undercover police officers.”

In a statement after the judge’s ruling, they said: "We are outraged that the High Court has allowed the police to use the IPT to preserve the secrecy of their abusive and manipulative operations in order to prevent public scrutiny and challenge.

"In comparison, the privacy of citizens spied on by secret police is being given no such protection, which is contrary to the principles we would expect in a democratic society.

"It is unacceptable that state agents can cultivate intimate and long-lasting relationships with political activists in order to gain so-called intelligence on political movements. We intend to continue this fight."

Only after the IPT has dealt with the human rights claims can the group have their day at the High Court and seek damages for misfeasance in public office, deceit, trespass to the person and negligence, the judge ruled.